On 11/4/03 12:00 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Date: 04 Nov 2003 11:39:32 -0600 > From: Tim Legant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: using a different "confirm_address" does not work > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > "F. Even" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > USERNAME is rarely used and only then as a final fallback, if TMDA > can't determine the appropriate address another way. For incoming > mail, the RECIPIENT environment variable, set by Postfix, is always > used, so USERNAME never comes into play. Why is this? It would seem that it should be the variable that is paid attention to if it is actually set. http://tmda.net/config-vars.html#USERNAME ...doesn't give the indication that this doesn't work if set. > If you want to base the confirmation address on a different address > than what is provided in RECIPIENT, CONFIRM_ADDRESS is the way to do > it. > >> Now, when someone tries to confirm their message w/ the above >> config, it also fails. > > Probably because when Postfix translates the address > [EMAIL PROTECTED] to > <acctname>@elitist.org, it loses the '-confirm-XXXXXXX.YYYYY.ZZZZZZ' > part, which TMDA needs to cryptographically verify the address. So > the message looks like a normal message to <acctname>@elitists.org. > > I don't know if there is a way to have Postfix preserve the extension > portion of the incoming address and append it to 'acctname' as part of > the alias processing. If so, that might work for you. The latest snapshot of postfix in fact does this now. But it is still not working. When the user replies to the message, the "x-original-to" header is [EMAIL PROTECTED], yet another confirmation is still sent back. This does not release the message. Frank _____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
